Evidence for God from Science

Dallas wrote:

I just don't understand it...So much hostility here and it's making me mad...

Must be all the pent-up sexual frustration.

Dallas wrote:I never seen so much hate towards a person from a group of Christians. Just because he believes in a Young earth really doesn't give anyone a right to judge him. This works the same the other way as well. You are missing the main point of Christianity and you are distracted by a simple means of creation. I just don't understand it...So much hostility here and it's making me mad...

I think that just as hate begets hate and violence begets violence, intolerance begets intolerance.
The moment a YEC says that a believer of Christ can't be such if they believe in evolution or that Earth is billions of years old or that Dinosaurs and Man share the same era, then many people who believe those things and find their faith in Christ under attack, they will respond in kind.
If a group of people refuse to see or disagree with the evidence for something, that is their right.
This "holier than thou" crap that happens between believers is just really sad when you think of it.

I may not believe that ALL the bible is to be take literal BUT I believe in My lord Jesus Christ, I believe in the salvation I find In Him, I believe He came to us, died and was resurrected, I believe in a Creator God that created the Universe through His Son, THE word of God and that HE is God of God and Our Lord and saviour, I believe in the power and grace of Father, Son and HS.

Why is my belief in My Lord and Saviour called into question because I don't subscribe to the view that ALL the bible must be literal and concrete?

Dallas, Ken Ham is a public figure, who spouts this garbage in public. Nothing wrong with exposing his arrogance. I am one of the biggest critics of Ken Ham, on this website, and I'm much harder on him because he is a Christian, and should know better. Theres no hate for him in my heart. It's no different than exposing someone like Benny Hinn. The only difference is that Ham doesn't see that he's driving people away from Christ, by his arrogance, and errors. The irony is that he makes a living saying that Old Earthers drive people away from God.

PaulSacramento wrote:

Why is my belief in My Lord and Saviour called into question because I don't subscribe to the view that ALL the bible must be literal and concrete?

YOU COMPROMISER!!!!!

RickD wrote:Dallas, Ken Ham is a public figure, who spouts this garbage in public. Nothing wrong with exposing his arrogance. I am one of the biggest critics of Ken Ham, on this website, and I'm much harder on him because he is a Christian, and should know better. Theres no hate for him in my heart. It's no different than exposing someone like Benny Hinn. The only difference is that Ham doesn't see that he's driving people away from Christ, by his arrogance, and errors. The irony is that he makes a living saying that Old Earthers drive people away from God.

I know a few atheists, I know some that were Christians and became atheists ( a few are former JW's).
I have noticed that IF there is a commonality in those that were Christian and became atheists, it is the holding of the bible to be literal ( which leads to what they see has issues with what science has proven to be facts).
I don't know of any that has become atheist SOLELY because of the literal view of Genesis or because of YEC, but those things were certainly PART of the problem'

RickD wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:

Why is my belief in My Lord and Saviour called into question because I don't subscribe to the view that ALL the bible must be literal and concrete?

YOU COMPROMISER!!!!!

Been called worse, LOL !

PaulSacramento wrote:

I know a few atheists, I know some that were Christians and became atheists ( a few are former JW's).
I have noticed that IF there is a commonality in those that were Christian and became atheists, it is the holding of the bible to be literal ( which leads to what they see has issues with what science has proven to be facts).
I don't know of any that has become atheist SOLELY because of the literal view of Genesis or because of YEC, but those things were certainly PART of the problem'.

Paul, I have no problem taking the bible literally. I just have a problem with such a concrete interpretation, that leaves no room for adjusting ones interpretation. Literal doesn't mean concrete, in the sense that Ken Ham concretely holds to.

RickD wrote:PaulSacramento wrote:

I know a few atheists, I know some that were Christians and became atheists ( a few are former JW's).
I have noticed that IF there is a commonality in those that were Christian and became atheists, it is the holding of the bible to be literal ( which leads to what they see has issues with what science has proven to be facts).
I don't know of any that has become atheist SOLELY because of the literal view of Genesis or because of YEC, but those things were certainly PART of the problem'.

Paul, I have no problem taking the bible literally. I just have a problem with such a concrete interpretation, that leaves no room for adjusting ones interpretation. Literal doesn't mean concrete, in the sense that Ken Ham concretely holds to.

Oh yes agreed, literal AND concrete is the correct way to term it.

I'm not saying just because you believe in an old earth/young earth that you can't go to heaven. That's totally the opposite I believe in....However, I do recall someone saying that they don't like taking the Bible "Literal" because man wrote it. Isn't there some fallacy in that statement? Because last time I checked, the HS told the authors what to write.

Dallas wrote:I'm not saying just because you believe in an old earth/young earth that you can't go to heaven. That's totally the opposite I believe in....However, I do recall someone saying that they don't like taking the Bible "Literal" because man wrote it. Isn't there some fallacy in that statement? Because last time I checked, the HS told the authors what to write.

I guess that depends on how one interprets "divine interpretation" and "God breathed" of course regardless of how that is, one can still "argue" that the copyists were not inspired.
You can't win a "bible is literal and concrete" argument, from either side, so I don't bother anymore because in the end I do NOT believe that it is faith in the BIBLE that saves, but faith in Christ, so...
As Paul said ( to paraphrase)," only by the HS can we say that Christ Is Lord"
Once we say this and believe this and put faith in this ( that Christ is lord) then the HS has Us and we are in Christ and Christ is in Us.
I am sure many a pagan became a Christian without ever reading the Bible as we know it, much less debating whether it is to be taken literal and concrete or not.

The huge rift between Yec and Oec faiths is not a Christ-ian taught manner. All are supposed to be in one accord, one body and this rift means that one or the other is wrong and is not lead by the holy spirit because error is not an aspect of the holy spirit.
From what I have read in this thread most here "believe" that they are in posession of the truth but I would ask how you know that such is the case?. How many here feel that they are not only willing to put their eternal lives on the line for their particular belief but also the lives of a multitude of others who are being taught to believe the same way? How would you feel to to know when you stand before God at judgement that not only were you wrong but that you caused a multitude of others to be wrong as well?

I would think it wise to reassess the foundational concepts that lead to this division. There are 3 possibilities that coud be determined, 1) you were right 2) they were right 3) both are wrong. I would say that all here should also consider which of those 3 options satan would most like to see happen and further consider that satan has had a hand even from the time of Christ in changing a pure understanding into a diluted one by mixing truth with falsehood and we can see its fruits by the vast number of differing christian sects that have come to be over time. I would further point out that each of these sects is absolutely confident that their understanding is the right one and are willing to put their lives on the line for it as well as the lives of their individual flocks.

From my understanding of the 2 positions noted in this thread;

1) Yec's take the understanding of creation in that the 6 'days' of creation acts performed by God were the equivalent of a thousand years for a day based on various biblical references which appear to be in direct conflict with scientific understanding.

2) Oec's take the understanding that these same '6 days' represent vast periods of time which allows their belief to fall more in line with science.

In both cases the division comes from the interpretation of what 6 days really means. I would be quite interested in participating in a thread that explores the two sides and how it is rationalised.

KBCid wrote:The huge rift between Yec and Oec faiths is not a Christ-ian taught manner. All are supposed to be in one accord, one body and this rift means that one or the other is wrong and is not lead by the holy spirit because error is not an aspect of the holy spirit.
From what I have read in this thread most here "believe" that they are in posession of the truth but I would ask how you know that such is the case?. How many here feel that they are not only willing to put their eternal lives on the line for their particular belief but also the lives of a multitude of others who are being taught to believe the same way? How would you feel to to know when you stand before God at judgement that not only were you wrong but that you caused a multitude of others to be wrong as well?

I would think it wise to reassess the foundational concepts that lead to this division. There are 3 possibilities that coud be determined, 1) you were right 2) they were right 3) both are wrong. I would say that all here should also consider which of those 3 options satan would most like to see happen and further consider that satan has had a hand even from the time of Christ in changing a pure understanding into a diluted one by mixing truth with falsehood and we can see its fruits by the vast number of differing christian sects that have come to be over time. I would further point out that each of these sects is absolutely confident that their understanding is the right one and are willing to put their lives on the line for it as well as the lives of their individual flocks.

From my understanding of the 2 positions noted in this thread;

1) Yec's take the understanding of creation in that the 6 'days' of creation acts performed by God were the equivalent of a thousand years for a day based on various biblical references which appear to be in direct conflict with scientific understanding.

2) Oec's take the understanding that these same '6 days' represent vast periods of time which allows their belief to fall more in line with science.

In both cases the division comes from the interpretation of what 6 days really means. I would be quite interested in participating in a thread that explores the two sides and how it is rationalised.

The issues is. in short, the interpretation of the hebrew word for "day" : yown
1) day, time, year

a) day (as opposed to night)

b) day (24 hour period)

1) as defined by evening and morning in Genesis 1

2) as a division of time

a) a working day, a day's journey

c) days, lifetime (pl.)

d) time, period (general)

e) year

f) temporal references

1) today

2) yesterday

3) tomorrow

KBCid wrote:The huge rift between Yec and Oec faiths is not a Christ-ian taught manner. All are supposed to be in one accord, one body and this rift means that one or the other is wrong and is not lead by the holy spirit because error is not an aspect of the holy spirit.
From what I have read in this thread most here "believe" that they are in posession of the truth but I would ask how you know that such is the case?. How many here feel that they are not only willing to put their eternal lives on the line for their particular belief but also the lives of a multitude of others who are being taught to believe the same way? How would you feel to to know when you stand before God at judgement that not only were you wrong but that you caused a multitude of others to be wrong as well?

I would think it wise to reassess the foundational concepts that lead to this division. There are 3 possibilities that coud be determined, 1) you were right 2) they were right 3) both are wrong. I would say that all here should also consider which of those 3 options satan would most like to see happen and further consider that satan has had a hand even from the time of Christ in changing a pure understanding into a diluted one by mixing truth with falsehood and we can see its fruits by the vast number of differing christian sects that have come to be over time. I would further point out that each of these sects is absolutely confident that their understanding is the right one and are willing to put their lives on the line for it as well as the lives of their individual flocks.

From my understanding of the 2 positions noted in this thread;

1) Yec's take the understanding of creation in that the 6 'days' of creation acts performed by God were the equivalent of a thousand years for a day based on various biblical references which appear to be in direct conflict with scientific understanding.

2) Oec's take the understanding that these same '6 days' represent vast periods of time which allows their belief to fall more in line with science.

In both cases the division comes from the interpretation of what 6 days really means. I would be quite interested in participating in a thread that explores the two sides and how it is rationalised.

KBCid, while I believe in OEC, it's certainly not something that I would put my life on the line for.

And, Your interpretation of 1), is off. All YECs that I know, hold that the days were 24 hours each.

As I've said before, and I'll say it again, "The age of the earth is NOT a salvation issue."

I would add that neither is taking the bible as literal and concrete a "salvation issue".
I would think that many a soul was saved without ever thinking that ALL the bible is to be viewed as literal and concrete.

Dallas wrote:I never seen so much hate towards a person from a group of Christians. Just because he believes in a Young earth really doesn't give anyone a right to judge him. This works the same the other way as well. You are missing the main point of Christianity and you are distracted by a simple means of creation. I just don't understand it...So much hostility here and it's making me mad...

RickD:

I know, because you've said it yourself, and I have, as well, that it's not ALL YECs that we are referring to here, so people won't think we're lumping all YECs into the same pile as the specific one's we've mentioned.

I know some very nice YECs. But pay attention to the conversation, so you don't get the wrong ideas